1911 Census Records

Lord Skidelsky: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What representations have been made to the Lord Chancellor to use his powers to open the 1911 Census Records for England and Wales next year, and when he expects to respond to these representations.

Lord Irvine of Lairg: Access to the 1911 Census Records is a matter for the Registrar General and all correspondence relating to the closure of that census for 100 years is referred to him.

Personal Injury Awards

Lord Colwyn: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they can estimate the increased cost of damages that will be awarded under the new discount rate of 2.5 per cent announced by the Lord Chancellor on 27 June; and whether this proposal was discussed beforehand with the Secretary of State for Health and the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Lord Irvine of Lairg: A full assessment of the impact of the new discount rate is being prepared and will be published in due course.
	There was wide public consultation between March and May 2000 on the setting of the discount rate for personal injury awards under Section 1 of the Damages Act 1996. Eighty-four responses were received. HM Treasury were consulted as part of that exercise pursuant to Section 1(4) of the Act, which requires the Lord Chancellor to consult the Treasury before making any order under Section 1(1).
	However, I did not discuss the rate, or my reasons for setting it at the level chosen, with either the Secretary of State for Health, the Chancellor of the Exchequer or any other Minister, in advance of taking my decision. The decision was mine and mine alone. My function was to set the discount rate at the right level in accordance with the law.

Financial Services and Markets Tribunal

Viscount Bledisloe: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What ministerial statements have been made relating to the privacy and confidentiality of proceedings on appeals to the Financial Services and Markets Tribunal other than the publication of the final determination of that tribunal.

Lord Irvine of Lairg: During the passage of the Financial Services and Markets Bill, Ministers stated that the Rules for the Financial Services and Markets Tribunal would cover the circumstances in which tribunal hearings were not held in public. They also gave commitments that the tribunal would comply with best practice as laid down by the Council on Tribunals. The council's Model Rules favour, for tribunal proceedings, a presumption of publicity with provision for private hearings. This approach is followed in the procedure rules for the Financial Services and Markets Tribunal. These were laid before Parliament on 10 July 2001 after limited consultation which followed the terms of the Code of Practice on Written Consultation. A number of ministerial statements were made on publication by the Financial Services Authority of its decision notice. These statements did not specifically address procedures at the tribunal stage.

Freedom of Information Act 2000: Implementation

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Chancellor on 9 July (WA 68), what programme of training has been agreed to prepare central Government's implementation of the Freedom of Information Act 2000; and what is the timetable for such training; and
	Whether it will be necessary to train Ministers and civil servants in central government departments in the practical implications of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 before it can be brought into force in respect of them.

Lord Irvine of Lairg: Each department will need to determine for itself what operational training--that is training relating to the procedures and processes to be used in dealing with requests for information--is needed and how to deliver that training. My officials will provide guidance to departments on the broad issues which should be covered in such training. This detailed training is best provided in the period immediately prior to the introduction of the Act's provisions to a public authority.
	In the meantime my officials are providing awareness training to departments and interest groups within government. The aim of this training is to ensure that departments know what actions they need to take now to prepare for the implementation of the Act. This training began in April and will continue throughout the year, though the content of the training will change to reflect developments as they occur.
	Presentations have been given to a number of departments and also to cross departmental groups including: Permanent Secretaries, the Senior Group on Data Protection and Freedom of Information, and the Government Information Service.
	Proper training is essential if the public are to be able to exercise their rights effectively when the provisions of the Act are brought into force.
	My officials are discussing with officials in the Centre for Management and Policy Studies in the Cabinet Office arrangements for a ministerial seminar on freedom of information later in the year.

Freedom of Information Act 2000: Implementation

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Lord Chancellor on 9 July (WA68), whether the Information Commissioner has made representations to them as to the period of time needed for her to acquire sufficient staff, with knowledge of the way the public sector works and appropriate investigative and project management skills, to enable her to perform the functions required under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

Lord Irvine of Lairg: Neither we nor the Information Commissioner can know at this stage how long it will take to recruit the staff necessary to enable her to perform the functions required under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. The commissioner and my officials are working together to ensure that the Act can be implemented as quickly and effectively as possible.

Freedom of Information Act 2000: Implementation

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Chancellor on 9 July (WA68), what is the relevance of the differences of the respective populations of Canada, Ireland and New Zealand to the pace of implementation of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

Lord Irvine of Lairg: The number of departments and officials in central government bears some relation to the population of the state in question. For example, central government in the United Kingdom is some 15 times the size of that in the Republic of Ireland. Therefore it is reasonable to expect that it will take longer to prepare those working in central government in the United Kingdom for the implementation of legislation than in the Republic of Ireland.

Government Departments: Data Matching

The Earl of Northesk: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What the legal position is in respect of data matching across government departments.

Lord Irvine of Lairg: As with any other activity, departments must act within their legal powers and not contravene any other relevant common or statute law, such as the common law duty of confidence and the Human Rights Act.
	Once a freestanding lawful basis has been established, departments must then ensure that their data matching is carried out in compliance with the eight data protection principles laid down in the Data Protection Act 1998 (or in reliance upon one of the Act's limited exemptions). Among other things, the principles require personal data to be processed fairly and lawfully and for limited purposes; to be accurate; not kept for longer than necessary; and held securely.

Lone Parents: Illness Statistics

Earl Russell: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the rate of long-term illness and disability among lone parents out of work; and what change there has been in this figure since 1991.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician, who has been asked to reply.
	Letter to the Earl Russell from the Executive Director of the Office for National Statistics, John Kidgell, dated 24 July 2001.
	The National Statistician has been asked to reply to your recent question on the rate of long-term illness and disability among lone parents out of work (HL381). I have been asked to reply in his absence.
	Estimates of lone parents with a long-term disability are available from the Labour Force Survey (LFS), and are included in its household dataset. Those not in employment consist of those who are unemployed or inactive. Data for 1991 are unavailable as disability status using the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) definition is only available on a consistent basis from 1998.
	In autumn (September-November) 2000, the estimate of the rate of long-term disability among lone parents who were not in employment was 32.1 per cent. This is an increase of 5.4 percentage points since autumn 1998.

PFI: Preferred Bidder Status

Lord Dixon-Smith: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What impact the ruling by the European Commission in Brussels that "preferred bidder" status should not be awarded until a full and open tender process has been completed will have on the private finance initiative process.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The Commission has not made a "ruling" in this respect but has made proposals for revising the EC public procurement directives. The proposals are the subject of continuing discussions in the Council and the European Parliament and the Government are optimistic that the final version will make express provision for best practice in the award of PFI and other major contracts.

Tourism Grants: VAT Charges

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the legal basis on which they charged VAT at 17.5 per cent on their grant of £14.2 million to the British Tourism Authority (BTA) and £3.8 million to the English Tourism Council (ETC); and whether the Chancellor of the Exchequer has the power to waive the collection of the VAT from BTA and the ETC; and
	What contingency plans have been made by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport to ensure that the British Tourism Authority (BTA) and the English Tourism Council (ETC) are compensated in full for the amount of VAT which they have paid to the Treasury on the Department for Culture, Media and Sport grant of £14.2 million made to the BTA and of £3.8 million made to the ETC.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The British Tourism Authority and the English Tourism Council were not charged VAT on these grants. Their grant income is and remains outside the scope of VAT.

Customs and Excise: Records of Searches

Lord Randall of St Budeaux: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Lord McIntosh of Haringey on 2 April (WA81), whether national records are maintained by HM Customs and Excise of people searched at ports and airports, and their ethnic appearance.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: HM Customs and Excise compiles and publishes national data about people searched under the powers of the Customs and Excise Management Act. The published data includes information about the percentage of such searches which prove to be successful and the ethnic appearance of the people searched. Specific information is not maintained or published about its use of search of person powers at individual ports and airports, including Heathrow. Customs and Excise does not maintain or publish records of people who are stopped but not searched, and who are free to leave after initial informal questions.

Retired Police Officers: Re-employment

Lord Janner of Braunstone: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will institute discussions with the Inland Revenue to find a way to remove obstacles that impede police officers from retiring from their posts with occupational pensions and then recommencing work shortly afterwards.

Lord Rooker: There are a number of issues associated with the re-employment of retired police officers that are currently being explored. In exploring these issues discussions with the Inland Revenue or others will take place as necessary.

Retired Police Officers: Re-employment

Lord Janner of Braunstone: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have any plans to remove the abatement rules that preclude a police officer from taking a full pension while working in a government post.

Lord Rooker: Abatement does not apply where a former police officer is re-employed on open competition in a post covered by a different public service pension scheme. It does not apply, even if a post is not subject to open competition, if a former officer is retired and is entitled to receive an immediate pension either because of length of service or age.
	If a former police officer in receipt of a pension is re-employed in a post covered by the police pension scheme--the scheme paying the pension--then abatement applies.
	Abatement is a matter of general public service pensions policy. The policy is kept under review in the light of changing circumstances.

Police Officers: Medical Retirement

Lord Janner of Braunstone: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What steps they are taking to reduce the percentage of police officers retiring for medical reasons.

Lord Rooker: We will be considering a range of issues relating to police pension arrangements, including the rate of officers retiring for medical reasons, in the coming months.

Police Officers: Medical Retirement

Lord Janner of Braunstone: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Of police officers who retire for medical reasons in each of the past five years and in each police district; what were the categories of such medical reasons; and how many and what proportion of such retirements fall into each of those categories.

Lord Rooker: The information requested is not available. Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary did, however, undertake a sample of the reasons for medical retirement in 10 forces in 1995-96 and 1996-97.
	The sample showed that for male officers 54 per cent of medical retirements were the result of musculo-skeletal conditions; 24 per cent resulted from psychological or mental health conditions; 5 per cent resulted from cardiovascular conditions; 12 per cent from other reasons; and 5 per cent from a combination of conditions.
	The sample showed that for female officers 47 per cent of medical retirements resulted from musculo-skeletal conditions; 38 per cent resulted from psychological or mental health conditions; 1 per cent resulted from cardiovascular conditions; 12 per cent from other reasons; and 2 per cent from a combination of conditions.

Police Forces: Civilianisation

Lord Janner of Braunstone: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What steps they are taking to involve former police officers in the civilianisation of the force.

Lord Rooker: Decisions on who to employ in each police force, and in what capacity, are the responsibility of each police authority and chief officer.

Police Force: Bureaucracy

Lord Janner of Braunstone: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What steps they are taking to deal with the alleged weight of bureaucracy in the police force.

Lord Rooker: We are implementing proposals from the recent report Making a Difference: Reducing Police Paperwork, and, last November we issued police forces in England and Wales with a revised Manual of Guidance for the Preparation, Processing and Submission of Files. This reduced considerably the number of forms officers have to complete when they pass cases to the Crown Prosecution Service.
	We are also investing in a range of new communications technology to minimise the paperwork that officers are required to process.
	In addition, the Home Secretary recently announced that he was setting up a study into the working day of a typical police officer in order to identify bureaucratic barriers which prevent officers from spending more time on the beat.

Police Force: Bureaucracy

Lord Janner of Braunstone: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they take into account the bureaucracy that can impact on the police when new legislation is being considered.

Lord Rooker: Yes, the Government are determined to keep bureaucratic burdens to a minimum. Also, all relevant police groups are consulted on proposed new legislation.

Young Offender Institutions: Reoffending Rates

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will publish rates of reoffending after two years for young offender institutions in England and Wales.

Lord Rooker: We collect reconviction rather than reoffending data. The latest available data are for those discharged from young offender institutions in 1996: 75 per cent were reconvicted for a standard list offence within two years of discharge. We do not produce figures for individual establishments; inmate transfers would make them meaningless.
	Further details of available figures are given in Chapter 9 of the Command Paper Prison Statistics England and Wales 1999, available in the Library.

Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority

Lord Pearson of Rannoch: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What are the terms of reference of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority; and to whom and to what extent is it accountable for its decisions and actions; and
	What is the burden of proof required by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority; and what criteria does it use when judging evidence or claims; and
	How the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority decides the amount of compensation it awards; and how much it awards annually; and
	What avenues are open to third parties to show that allegations brought before the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority are false.

Lord Rooker: The Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority was established to administer the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme, approved by both Houses of Parliament, made by my right honourable friend the then Home Secretary (Mr Straw) on 12 December 1995 under powers conferred by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 1995 and effective for all claims made on or after 1 April 1996.
	Under this tariff-based scheme (the 1996 scheme) and its successor scheme (the 2001 scheme), the authority determines what awards should be paid in individual cases in accordance with the tariff of injuries appended to the scheme and the scheme provisions relating to loss of earnings, care costs and other heads of damage.
	The authority's decisions are open to appeal to an independent appellate body, the Criminal Injuries Compensation Appeals Panel, the members of which are appointed by the Home Secretary and the Scottish Ministers.
	The authority chief executive is responsible for the preparation of the authority's financial statements. These are audited by the National Audit Office to ensure that they properly represent the receipts and payments of the authority and are properly prepared in accordance with the Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 1995 and whether in all material respects the receipts and payments have been applied to the purposes intended by Parliament and conform to the authorities which govern them.
	The burden of proof required by the authority and the panel is that applicable in civil proceedings, namely the balance of probabilities. Each case is considered on its merits.
	In the financial year 2000-01 the scheme paid out some £206 million in compensation.
	Third parties who consider that allegations brought before the authority or the appeals panel are false should bring them to the attention of those bodies or to the police or to another appropriate authority. However, it is for the authority and appeals panel alone to determine claims in the light of all the information available to them. Under the terms of the scheme approved by Parliament those bodies are exclusively responsible for settling claims and for the interpretation of the scheme rules.

Miscarriages of Justice Compensation: Independent Assessor

Baroness Howells of St Davids: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Who will succeed Sir David Calcutt QC as independent assessor of compensation for miscarriages of justice for England and Wales.

Lord Rooker: My noble friend Lord Brennan will succeed Sir David Calcutt as independent assessor of compensation for miscarriage of justice for England and Wales with effect from 27 July. The noble Lord, Lord Brennan, was selected through an open and equal competition in line with the guidance of the Commissioner for Public Appointments and his appointment was made by the predecessor of my right honourable Friend the Home Secretary (Mr Straw) on the advice of an advisory panel with an independent member.

Tristan Da Cunha

Lord Alton of Liverpool: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What funding has been made available to Tristan Da Cunha following the damage inflicted by the recent hurricane; and, in particular, what medical provision is currently available on the island.

Baroness Amos: We provided £75,000 to help with storm damage. This included repairs to the hospital and replacement of damaged medical equipment. A doctor and nursing staff are available on the island.

Genetically Modified Food: Discussions

Lord Judd: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In view of their policy towards genetically modified food and its production, what discussions they have had with the United Nations Development Programme on that body's endorsement of such food production in developing countries and on the relevance of such a policy to sustainable development, health and biodiversity; and what was the outcome of any such discussions.

Baroness Amos: We have not held bilateral discussions with the UNDP on these issues. However, we are taking an active role in the international debate on biotechnology and GMOs. The Government, in co-operation with the OECD, Food and Agriculture Organisation, the World Health Organisation, the United Nations Environment Programme, and the Secretariat to the Convention on Biological Diversity sponsored a conference in Bangkok, Thailand, last week to explore ways to integrate best scientific knowledge on the safety of GM crops and foods into the international processes for consensus building. Its aim was to ensure international biosafety activities incorporate the best scientific evidence and address public concerns. The UK provided support for developing country experts to help ensure the views of developing countries were well represented.
	The Government's view is that genetic modification technologies have the potential to provide great benefits for people and the environment when managed responsibly. We remain concerned to help ensure that in developing countries they are used safely, appropriately and effectively to bring real benefits to poor people and that these countries are in a position to manage their safe development and use. A background briefing note on DfID's approach to GMOs and developing countries is available on the DfID website at http://www.dfid.gov.uk/public/news/briefgmo.html.

Bermuda: Constitutional Reform

Lord Waddington: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether consultation has taken place in Bermuda with regard to the recent proposals for constitutional reform; whether they considered such consultation satisfactory; and whether they consider that the people of Bermuda are in favour of single member constituencies and a reduction in the size of the House of Assembly.

Baroness Amos: Yes. The Government of Bermuda's proposals to amend the constitution were presented to the Bermuda Legislature on 18 August 2000. The proposals were discussed in the local media and a series of public meetings were held in the autumn. Following this public debate the proposals were debated in the Bermuda House of Assembly and Senate. A resolution was passed by the House of Assembly requesting that an Order in Council be made to implement the proposals. An FCO team visited Bermuda at the beginning of April to hold consultations with the political parties and interested members of the public about the various proposals for constitutional reform. The proposal for single member constituencies reflects a pre-election manifesto commitment of the Government of Bermuda and has been endorsed by resolution of the House of Assembly. However, there will be a further opportunity to discuss proposed changes to the electoral system when the Constituency Boundaries Commission has made its report. It is premature to say that the House of Assembly will be reduced in size. Given the prescribed parameters of 20 to 40 constituencies, the commission's recommendations would not necessarily be to the effect that the number of Members of the House should be reduced from the current 40.

Bermuda: Constitutional Reform

Lord Waddington: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why it is proposed to change the Bermuda constitution, empowering a boundaries commission to make recommendations as to whether there should be single member constituencies and how many seats there should be in the House of Assembly, without there first being a constitutional conference to seek agreement on these matters; and whether these arrangements are compatible with the undertaking given by the British Government in 1966 that no major change in the constitution would be made without such a conference.

Baroness Amos: Her Majesty's Government responded to the request by the democratically elected Government of Bermuda to take forward their proposals to amend the Bermuda constitution. Ministers have approved a draft Order in Council which, inter alia, will enable the Constituency Boundaries Commission to recommend the number and boundaries of constituencies in a report to the Governor. The commission would act in accordance with prescribed terms of reference and invite views from the public. The commission's report would be debated in the House of Assembly and the Governor would be required to transmit it, with the views of the House, to the Secretary of State. The report would then be considered.
	Before making any decision on the commission's recommendations, further consultation with Bermuda would be required, and the Secretary of State would wish to take into account the report and local reactions to it. It would be premature now to decide that in any event a constitutional conference should be held or a referendum organised. But neither option has been ruled out. Her Majesty's Government will consider all possible options at the time. The Government do not believe that the present draft Order in Council will make major changes to the Bermuda constitution.

Zambia: Death of Mr Paul Tembo

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will use Commonwealth or bilateral channels to ask the Government of Zambia to set up an independent judicial inquiry into the murders on 6 July of Mr Paul Tembo (a leading opposition politician) and into the murders of other members of the opposition.

Baroness Amos: We are deeply concerned at the news of Mr Tembo's death. The Zambian Government are well aware of that concern. They know that the international community wants to see the culprits brought to justice rapidly. I am sure we should give their judicial authorities the chance to do so before considering international action. But we shall monitor developments and reconsider our position should they not make early progress.

Western Sahara

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they intend to support the framework agreement for the solution of the Western Sahara problem, granting autonomy of the territory and providing for a referendum in which Moroccan residents would be entitled to vote, irrespective of whether or not the agreement of the Frente Polisario can be obtained.

Baroness Amos: Her Majesty's Government supported UN Security Council Resolution 1359 which was passed unanimously on 29 June 2001. It extended the mandate of the UN Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara (MINURSO) until 30 November 2001. This resolution reiterated full support for the ongoing efforts of MINURSO to implement the settlement plan and agreements adopted by the parties to hold a free, fair and impartial referendum for the self-determination of the people of the Western Sahara. It also confirmed full support for the efforts of the UN Secretary-General to invite all the parties to meet directly or through proximity talks, under the auspices of his personal envoy, James Baker, and encouraged the parties to discuss the draft framework agreement and negotiate any specific changes they would like to see in this proposal, as well as to discuss any other prosposal for a political solution, to arrive at a mutually acceptable agreement. Her Majesty's Government's objective is to assist the parties to achieve a just and lasting solution to the question of Western Sahara.

Nigerian High Commission: NNDR Debts

Lord Marlesford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What action they plan to take in respect of the £339,945 of national non-domestic rates unpaid at 16 July by the diplomatic mission of Nigeria; and how long this sum has been owing.

Baroness Amos: Her Majesty's Government are very concerned at the level of national non-domestic rates (NNDR) debts owed by the Nigerian High Commission and are proposing to take up this issue with the Nigerian authorities, both here and in Abuja as a matter of urgency.
	The Government have asked the Valuation Office Agency for details of how long this sum has been owing.

Nigerian High Commission: Unpaid Traffic Fines

Lord Marlesford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What action they propose to take in respect of the 1,084 unpaid parking and minor traffic violation fines outstanding on 16 July in respect of the diplomatic mission of Nigeria.

Baroness Amos: Her Majesty's Government are very concerned at the high number of unpaid parking and minor traffic violation fines owed by the Nigerian High Commission.
	The Government are proposing to take up this issue with the Nigerian authorities, both here and in Abuja, as a matter of urgency.

Belarus: Disappearance of Prominent Figures

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they, the European Union or the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe have had any positive replies to their inquiries concerning the fate of Mr Viktor Gonchar, Mr Analtoly Krasorsky, Mr Yuri Zakharenko and Mr Dimitri Zavadsky, who have disappeared in Belarus.

Baroness Amos: I regret to inform the noble Lord that neither Her Majesty's Government nor European Union partners, nor the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe, have received any response from the Belarusian authorities that leads us to believe that they are making serious efforts to conduct a thorough investigation into the disappearances of Viktor Gonchar, Anatoly Krasovsky, Yuri Zakharenko and Dmitri Zavadsky. But the Government will continue to press the Belarusian authorities to ascertain the fate of these prominent figures. A European Union Declaration to this effect was issued on 7 May, the second anniversary of the disappearance of Yuri Zakharenko. On 12 July, European Union partners issued a statement at the Permanent Council of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe calling for the Belarusian authorities to comment on reports of the existence of Belarusian death squads and their alleged involvement in the disappearances. The Government understand that the trial of two members of the special police force charged with the abduction of Dmitri Zavadsky will take place in August. We will monitor this trial closely.

Brazil: Street Children

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What action they have taken since June 1998, when the report The Silent War was published, to encourage the Government of Brazil to arrest and punish the killers of street children in Rio de Janeiro and other cities.

Baroness Amos: The Government have discussed the distressing plight of street children in Brazil in the context of the annual Human Rights Dialogue which was launched with the Brazilian authorities in November 2000. We expect to hold a second round by the end of this year. The Brazilian federal authorities have welcomed this exchange and deserve credit for the constructive approach they have adopted to help deal with these problems. The United Kingdom has supported programmes targeted at helping children. We are currently assisting the Brazilian police and prison service with training to help raise their human rights awareness, which we hope will also contribute to better treatment of children on the street.

Laos

Lord Alton of Liverpool: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What recent reports they have received concerning the persecution of Christians in Laos; how much aid they give in each year to Laos; and whether they make such aid dependent on an improvement in that country's human rights record.

Baroness Amos: It has not been possible to collate this information in the time given. I will write to the noble Lord once the information is available.

Prime Minister's Special Envoy

The Earl of Northesk: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Baroness Amos on 10 July (WA73), what has been the cost of the "logistics and administrative support, including use of an office in London and official accommodation overseas, and briefing as necessary" provided by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office to the Prime Minister's special envoy in each of the financial years since his appointment.

Baroness Amos: The FCO and embassies have provided logistical and administrative support, the cost of which is not separately itemised, for the missions the noble Lord, Lord Levy, has undertaken. This has included accommodation, briefing, assistance in arranging programmes and accompanied transport by road. The noble Lord, Lord Levy, travels at his own expense.

Grigory Pasko

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What reports they have received of the trial of Grigory Pasko, who is accused of treason through espionage under Article 275 of the Russian penal code in the Vladivostok court, after having been acquitted on the same charge by the court of the pacific fleet; and whether they consider that the proceedings against Mr Pasko contravene Council of Europe or Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe principles.

Baroness Amos: We continue to monitor the second trial against Grigory Pasko closely, as we did the first, which we consistently raised with the Russians. The Minister at the Embassy in Moscow met Pasko in Vladivostok on 12 July and made clear the Government's concern at the renewal of legal proceedings. We note that Pasko could exercise his right of individual petition to bring a case in Strasbourg against the Russian Federation for a possible breach of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Colombia: Peace Process

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they are discussing with Colombia and the United States the probable consequences of Plan Colombia; and whether they will continue to provide moral and material support of the village of San Jose de Apartado and other places in Colombia which seek to function as zones of peace.

Baroness Amos: We continue to have extensive discussions with the Colombian Government, and with the US Administration, about developments in Colombia, including the peace process and the implementation of Plan Colombia, as well as the development of the EU package we are supporting.
	The British Embassy in Bogota is in regular contact with the Colombian authorities on the safety and protection of vulnerable groups, including members of the peace communities in the Departments of Choco and Antioquia. British Embassy officials in Bogota raised our specific concerns about the peace community in San Jose de Apartado with the Head of the Human Rights Unit at the Vice Presidency on 9 May 2001 and with the Prosecutor General's Office on 7 June 2001.
	The UK and Dutch Governments are co-sponsoring a project proposed by the peace community to build a refuge in the town of Rio Sucio where members of the community can stay.

European Political Parties:Proposed Council Regulation

Lord Molyneaux of Killead: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean on 9 July (WA60), whether they accept that Article 308 of the treaty establishing the European Community is an adequate legal basis for the proposal for a Council regulation on the statute and financing of European political parties (COM(2001) 343 final).

Baroness Amos: Her Majesty's Government have considered this proposal carefully and have come to the conclusion that the use of Article 308 is justified legally. Provided the details of the regulation are right, we are content that Article 308 be used, not least to ensure full transparency of funding for European Political Parties as soon as possible.

European Political Parties:Proposed Council Regulation

Lord Molyneaux of Killead: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean on 9 July (WA60), whether any provisions of the proposal for Council regulation on the statute and financing of European political parties (COM(2001) 343 final) as published on 21 June are incompatible with the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000.

Baroness Amos: The draft regulation on the statute and financing of European political parties is compatible with the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000.

European Council: Status

Lord Bruce of Donington: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will set out, in respect of the European Council:
	(a) its international legal status;
	(b) by whom, and when, it was first appointed;
	(c) its constitution;
	(d) its composition;
	(e) its powers;
	(f) its financing;
	(g) its functions;
	(h) its relationship with the Council of Ministers;
	(i) where it meets; and
	(j) the frequency of its meeting.

Baroness Amos: The status of the European Council is governed by Article 4 of the Treaty on European Union: it was recognised as a separate Community body in 1986 by Article 2 of the Single European Act, although it had been meeting on a regular basis since 1975. It brings together the heads of state or government and the Ministers for Foreign Affairs of the member states and the President and one member of the Commission. It meets at least twice a year, under the chairmanship of the head of state or government of the member state holding the Presidency of the Council. Meetings are held either in the country holding the Presidency or in Brussels. Declaration 22 annexed to the Treaty of Nice provides that from 2002, one European Council meeting per Presidency will be held in Brussels. When the number of member states reaches 18, all European Council meetings will be held in Brussels.
	The role of the European Council is to provide the Union with the necessary impetus for its development and to define the general political guidelines thereof. The Council of Ministers is the principal decision-making body within the Union.
	The Council Secretariat finances the travel and accommodation costs of a certain number of delegates for each member state. All other costs are met by the member state hosting the European Council.

Moluccan Islands: Human Rights

Baroness Ludford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What action they are taking to tackle human rights abuses in Indonesia's Moluccan Islands.

Baroness Amos: Her Majesty's Government continue to be very concerned about events in Indonesia, particularly Maluku.
	Our Ambassador to Indonesia has visited Maluku twice this year. These visits provided an opportunity to assess the situation at first hand. Together with other international partners we are working with the Indonesian authorities and UNDP to promote reconciliation in the province.
	The Government welcome the commitment of the Indonesian leadership to resolve the country's regional conflicts through dialogue and reconciliation. The challenge for Indonesia is to build on the foundations laid by the recent democratic process and to deliver human rights that benefit everybody. Her Majesty's Government will play a full part in helping towards that goal.

Judicial Committee of the Privy Council: Audibility of Proceedings

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will take steps to improve the audibility of proceedings before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council has a modern amplification system and complaints of inaudability have hitherto been fairly rare, but there have been one or two complaints recently. Investigations will be carried out to see what improvements can be made. If the noble Lord has any particular problems in mind perhaps he could let me have the details.

UK Parliament: Composition

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	To what extent they believe that the composition of the national legislature should reflect the will of the people in a representative democracy; and to what extent they consider the will of the people to be paramount in determining the composition of the United Kingdom Parliament.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: We believe that the most essential requirement in a democracy is that the will of the people should determine who will form the Government. In the United Kingdom's parliamentary democracy, that is done through elections to the House of Commons, whose Members are the representatives of the people, and whose support the Government must receive if they are to continue in office. The Government believe that the composition of the United Kingdom Parliament must never be allowed to obscure or undermine that fundamental relationship.

UK Parliament: Composition

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What they understand by the term "representative democracy" in the context of both Houses of Parliament.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The United Kingdom as a whole is a democracy and the composition of Parliament as a whole must respect that. The Government believe that this is best achieved by allowing the voice of the people to be clearly heard in the choice of the Government.

UK Parliament: Composition

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Privy Seal (Lord Williams of Mostyn) on 3 July (WA36) that the "necessary institutions and safeguards of a mature democracy extend well beyond those circumstances where it is appropriate for the will of the people to be paramount on every occasion and issues", on what occasions and issues they consider the will of the people to be paramount in Great Britain; and whether this extends to the composition of the national legislature.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The United Kingdom's parliamentary democracy requires most importantly the will of the people to be paramount in the selection of the Government.

Lord Chancellor: Place in the Cabinet

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Given that the Lord Privy Seal (Lord Williams of Mostyn) gave the "independence of the judiciary" (HL Deb, 21 June, col. 113) as a reason for his rejection of the proposition "that democracy is all about the will of the people to be paramount", what is the justification for the head of the judiciary, the Lord Chancellor, to hold a place in the Cabinet.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The value of a Lord Chancellor is that he upholds judicial independence and can mediate between the executive and judiciary when need be. The office of the Lord Chancellor is the guarantor of judicial independence in our constitution. It holds the different parts together and withstands pressure from all sides.

House of Lords Appointments Commission

Lord Acton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What the term of office is of the current chairman of the House of Lords Appointments Commission.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Three years from 2000.

House of Lords Appointments Commission

Lord Jacobs: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many interviews were attended by each member of the House of Lords Appointments Commission when they interviewed 51 of the 3,166 applicants.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The information requested is as follows:
	
		
			   
			 Lord Stevenson of Coddenham 51 
			 Dame Deirdre Hine 15 
			 Mrs Angela Sarkis 16 
			 Ms Felicity Huston 15 
			 Lord Hurd of Westwell 13 
			 Baroness Dean of Thornton le Fylde 11 
			 Lord Dholakia 12

Gracious Speech: Cabinet Office Explanatory Briefing

Baroness Eccles of Moulton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, in future, they will place in the Library of the House, at the conclusion of the gracious Speech, a copy of the Cabinet Office's explanatory briefing on the content of the gracious Speech, which is prepared and distributed to journalists; and why that material was not made available to Parliament on the opening day of the current parliamentary Session.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Members of this House and another place have a full opportunity to scrutinise the contents of the Queen's Speech in a range of debates and as the legislation is brought before Parliament.

PIU Energy Review

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What their timetable is for the energy review and in particular over what period the interested parties will be able to submit evidence; how such parties will be informed of the timetable; and to whom they may make submissions.

Lord Macdonald of Tradeston: The Performance and Innovation Unit (PIU) Energy Review was announced by the Prime Minister on 25 June 2001 and will report by the end of the year. Details of the timetable will be published shortly in the Review Project Management Plan to be posted on the PIU website www.cabinet-office.gov.uk/innovation).
	The Project Scoping Note and a paper entitled 'How we will be conducting the review' have already been posted on the PIU website. Interested parties have been invited to submit written evidence, ideally arriving by 10 September 2001. Written submissions should be sent to The Energy Review Team, Performance and Innovation Unit, Cabinet Office, Admiralty Arch, The Mall, London SW1A 2WH, or by email to the energyteamcontact@cabinet-office.x.gsi.gov.uk. In addition, the Energy Review Team are organising a series of workshops and bilateral meeting to receive oral submissions, and interested parties have been invited to propose representatives to attend.
	Hard copies of any material posted on the website can be received on written request to the above address.

Disability Issues: Ministerial Responsibility

Lord Astor of Hever: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Who are the Ministers responsible for disability issues; and what are their respective responsibilities.

Lord Macdonald of Tradeston: Maria Eagle, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, has responsibility for civil rights for disabled people, including the Disability Discrimination Act and the Disability Rights Commission, for disability benefits, and for the promotion and co-ordination of disability issues across Government.
	A number of other Ministers have responsibility for specific disability issues. Detailed information on ministerial responsibilities is set out in The List of Ministerial Responsibilities which is available in the Library of the House.

Long-term Developments: Role of Whitehall Directorates

Lord Redesdale: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, in light of recent machinery of government changes, they will:
	(a) list all Whitehall directorates whose role is to inform government thinking on the challenges and opportunities that may arise out of medium to long-term future developments in the social, environmental, commercial and scientific or technological spheres;
	(b) state the aims and objectives of each of these directorates; and
	(c) explain the interaction between them.

Lord Macdonald of Tradeston: This information is not readily available because many parts of central government play a role in the development of forward thinking and policy on how to meet challenges in these areas and create or seize opportunities for positive change.

Special Advisers

Lord Lipsey: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will list the special advisers to Ministers.

Lord Macdonald of Tradeston: A list of special advisers currently in post has been placed in the Library of the House together with the new Code of Conduct for Special Advisers, the revised Model Contract for Special Advisers and details of the new pay arrangements for special advisers.

Russia: Nuclear Waste

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What progress has been made since January 1999 in eliminating the most dangerous kinds of nuclear waste in Russia, particularly in and near the White Sea; and what the programme is for the next three years.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: Progress has been made in co-operation with the Russian authorities in identifying priority projects in north-west Russia to facilitate Russian efforts to deal with this problem. This has, however, been held up by the delay in agreeing a legal framework under which this work can take place.
	It is hoped that a bilateral UK/Russia agreement can be signed shortly which will allow work to commence. Our first project, to provide a spent nuclear fuel storage facility in north-west Russia, can then begin immediately. Other projects, focusing on the main issue of spent nuclear fuel, will follow on closely.

European Telecommunications Council, 27 June

The Earl of Northesk: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Lord Sainsbury of Turville on 16 July (WA100), whether they will publish the minutes of the European Telecommunications Council of 27 June in order that their position at that meeting can be understood fully.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: The Council does not publish minutes of its proceedings either generally or to member states, although meeting and summaries are available on the Council's website.

Data Protection: Civil Liberties Committee Report

The Earl of Northesk: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Lord Sainsbury of Turville on 16 July (WA100), how they respond to the European Parliament's Civil Liberties Committee's approval of the report from Marco Cappato MEP.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: The draft Communications Data Protection Directive is subject to co-decision procedures. It will therefore need to be agreed by both the European Parliament and member states before it can be adopted. Member states and the Commission will need to formulate a joint response both to the amendments proposed in the report from the Civil Liberties Committee, and the vote of the plenary session of the European Parliament due to take place early in September, when they meet to agree a common position in October.

Smaller River Hydro Schemes

Lord Marlesford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is their policy on encouraging hydro-generation of electricity by smaller river hydro schemes.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: Smaller river hydro schemes receive support under the Non-Fossil Fuel Obligation and it is proposed that they should be eligible for support under the Renewables Obligation.
	The DTI in conjunction with industry is looking at the issues relating to grid connection for small-scale electricity generators including those involved in smaller river hydro schemes.

Postal Voting

Lord Greaves: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What consideration they have given to the risk of electoral fraud as a result of the universal availability of postal voting; and, in particular, whether they would support the compilation of "marked registers" of electors who have returned postal votes.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The Electoral Commission, as part of its functions, is carrying out a review of the way the general election was conducted which will include the operation of the postal vote system. It expects to publish its findings shortly. We would wish to consider the findings of that review before deciding whether any further action is necessary on postal vote procedures.

Ballot Papers: Party Logos

Lord Greaves: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Falconer of Thoroton on 16 July (WA107), what recourse a candidate has if the returning officer fails to place on the ballot paper the correct party logo which has been properly supplied by the candidate representing the registered party concerned.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: It is open to anyone to raise a petition in the electoral court if they consider that any action of a returning officer has unfairly affected the result of the election. In addition, anyone can inform the police for consideration of action under Section 63 of the Representation of the People Act 1983 if they consider that the returning officer has committed a breach of his official duty.

Trunk Roads: Advertising

Lord Marlesford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What progress the police have made with their inquiries into the cutting back of planting on land belonging to the Highways Agency bordering the A12 trunk road Witham bypass adjacent to the advertising hoardings on land owned by Braintree District Council; and what steps they intend to take to ensure that these plantings are not again cut back to expose the advertising hoardings.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The Highways Agency understands that Essex Police have been in touch with Braintree District Council and the Allam Group, the organisation that controls advertising on most of the hoardings, to make enquiries. Essex Police have indicated that it would be difficult to identify the culprit(s) responsible.
	The Highways Agency is unable to guarantee that other parties will not attempt to cut back the planting on the embankment in the future. Braintree District Council, the Allam Group and its clients are now aware of the agency's position regarding the planting and that it will take the strongest action against those proven to have caused criminal damage or trespass.

Trunk Roads: Advertising

Lord Marlesford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Along which trunk roads in England and Wales advertising is displayed contrary to Planning Policy Guidance Note No. 19 and the Department of the Environment Circular 5/92.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The information requested by the noble Lord is not available. Trunk roads in Wales are the responsibility of the National Assembly for Wales. Our policy in England is that the Highways Agency should not permit the placing of advertisements on trunk road land in contravention of PPG19 or DoE Circular 5/92 and any unauthorised advertisements should be removed. Control of advertisements on land outside the trunk road boundary is the responsibility of local planning authorities.

Rating (Former Agricultural Premises and Rural Shops) Act 2001

Earl Peel: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they will bring forward the necessary commencement orders in order to bring the provisions of the Rating (Former Agricultural Premises and Rural Shops) Act 2001 into force.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The Rating (Former Agricultural Premises and Rural Shops) Act 2001 (Commencement No. 1) Order 2001 was signed on 16 July. All the provisions of the 2001 Act will come into effect on 15 August 2001. Commencement of the Act in Wales is a matter for the National Assembly for Wales.

Rating (Former Agricultural Premises and Rural Shops) Act 2001

Earl Peel: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What they are doing to promote awareness of the provisions of the Rating (Former Agricultural Premises and Rural Shops) Act 2001 among those whom it is intended to benefit; and whether they will monitor the take-up rate in rural areas.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: Local authorities will initially be responsible for bringing the new farm diversification relief and the extension of village shop rate relief to food shops to the attention of potential recipients. Department officials have already written to local authorities informing them that the Act will be commenced in England on 15 August. They have also written to the National Farmers Union and the Country Land and Business Association which will no doubt bring the Act to the attention of their members. In addition we intend to issue a more detailed press statement about the new reliefs on the day the Act is commenced.

Rating (Former Agricultural Premises and Rural Shops) Act 2001

Earl Peel: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What percentage of agricultural businesses and rural shops they estimate will benefit from the new provision of rate relief under the Rating (Former Agricultural Premises and Rural Shops) Act 2001; and what percentage will be unable to benefit, as a result of the limitation of a rateable value of £6,000.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The number of businesses receiving the new farm diversification relief will depend on how many such businesses are established. There are no precise figures available on the number of businesses that will or will not benefit from the new farm diversification relief, because it is not known how many new enterprises will in future be established and how many of those will be below the qualifying rateable threshold of £6,000. We have estimated that between 5 per cent and 30 per cent of farms in England may establish businesses that are eligible for the new relief, but the eventual figure will depend on demand.
	It is also difficult to give precise figures on the number of businesses benefiting from the extension of village shop rate relief to food shops, as they are not currently separately identified in the rating system. However, it is estimated that there are about 3,000 food shops in small rural parishes. We would expect most of these to have rateable values of less than £6,000.

Rating (Former Agricultural Premises and Rural Shops) Act 2001

Earl Peel: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In view of the recent Green Paper on local government finance, which uses a rateable value of £8,000 to determine a small business, whether they consider the rateable value limitation of £6,000, under the Rating (Former Agricultural Premises and Rural Shops) Act 2001, to be adequate, especially in the light of the differences that exist between regions.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: the Green Paper Modernising Local Government Finance last year proposed a tapered scheme of rate relief, which was targeted on small businesses with rateable values up to £6,000. It proposed that relief would be 50 per cent for properties with rateable values up to £3,000, reducing at higher rateable values to 20 per cent at £6,000 rateable value. This covers a very large number of properties. To avoid any unfairness to businesses just above the £6,000 threshold, it is proposed to provide a small amount of relief to slightly larger properties, continuing to taper from 20 per cent relief at £6,000 rateable value to 0 per cent relief at £8,000 rateable value. The £8,000 threshold is therefore the point at which businesses cease to receive any relief and above which they instead contribute to the costs of the scheme.
	The two new rate reliefs under the 2001 Act are completely different. All qualifying businesses will receive 50 per cent rate relief, up to £6,000 rateable value, with the possibility of the local authority increasing this to 100 per cent if they feel there is a need. It is therefore more generous than the one outlined in the Green Paper for all small businesses.
	Farm diversification relief is specifically designed for small non-agricultural business on farms. Information obtained from the Valuation Office Agency indicates that the vast majority of small enterprises that are typically established on farms have rateable values of less than £6,000 in all parts of England. Information also suggests that most village food shops fall below this threshold.

Rating (Former Agricultural Premises and Rural Shops) Act 2001

Earl Peel: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What additional resources will be made available to poorer local authorities to offset the additional costs of the Rating (Former Agricultural Premises and Rural Shops) Act 2001 so as to ensure that the discretionary relief can be applied equally across the country by all local authorities.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The Exchequer will meet 75 per cent of the cost of any discretionary relief granted under the provisions of the 2001 Act. This is the same as any other discretionary rate relief available to ratepayers. The requirement on local authorities to meet 25 per cent of the cost of granting discretionary relief does not appear to affect their granting if they feel there is a need to. Indeed experience with the existing village shop rate relief scheme would suggest that a substantial number of businesses receiving 50 per cent mandatory relief have had this topped up with discretionary relief by local authorities.

New Millennium Experience Company: Finances

Baroness Noakes: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will publish the costs expected to be incurred by the New Millennium Experience Company Limited for each of the months July to December analysed into:
	(a) maintenance;
	(b) dealing with legal contracts entered into during the liftetime of the project;
	(c) hand over of the site to English Partnerships;
	(d) other administrative expenditure, including appointing and liaising with a liquidator; and (e) any other expenditure not covered by the above, including one-off items; and
	What amount of National Lottery grant allocation to the New Millennium Experience Company Limited remains unspent at 30 June; and what amount is expected to be unspent at 31 December 2001.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: I will write to the noble Baroness and place a copy of my letter in the Libraries of both Houses.

Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will publish any statistical analysis of the more than 1,400 expressions of interest in appointment to the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: No data (other than a mailing name and address) were collected from individuals requesting further information on appointments to the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission, so no analysis of these is possible. All applicants were requested to complete an equality monitoring form as part of their application, but were under no obligation to answer any or all of the questions. An analysis of this data will be published in due course as part of the department's wider obligations under Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act.

Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will publish any statistical analysis of the more than 500 completed application forms for appointment to the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission, based on information given in the application form and the equality monitoring form where this information is legally disclosable.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: No data (other than a mailing name and address) were collected from individuals requesting further information on appointments to the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission, so no analysis of these is possible. All applicants were requested to complete an equality monitoring form as part of their application, but were under no obligation to answer any or all of the questions. An analysis of this data will be published in due course as part of the department's wider obligations under Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act.

Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What criteria were used to draw up a shortlist for interview for appointment to the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission; and how many people have been shortlisted.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The same criteria, which were detailed in the applicants' information pack, have been used throughout the appointments process: teamwork; policy development and analytical skills; organisational skills and awareness; communication; planning and organisation of work; physical and financial resource management; and drive and motivation. Twenty-two people have been invited to attend an interview.

Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission was consulted, formally or informally, on the applications for appointment to the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission has not been consulted, formally or informally, on the applications for appointment to the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission.

Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the Irish Government were consulted, formally or informally, on the applications for appointment to the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commisison.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The Irish Government were not consulted, formally or informally, on the applications for appointment to the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission.

Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Who will constitute the interviewing panel(s) on 18 to 20 July and 31 July to 3 August 2001, or at any rearranged dates, for appointments to the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The panel interviewing candidates for appointment to the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission will be chaired by Mr Chris Maccabe (Associate Political Director, Northern Ireland Office). The other panel members will be Mrs Judith Eve (Independent Assessor; Queen's University, Belfast) and Mr John Keanie (former Chief Executive, Derry City Council).

Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When it is intended to advertise for the position of Chief Human Rights Commissioner in the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission, which becomes vacant on 17 January 2002, and the positions of the eight remaining commissioners, which become vacant on 28 February 2002.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: No decision has yet been made regarding the re-appointment of either the Chief Commissioner or the other commissioners to the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission, whose terms of appointment all end on 28 February 2002.

Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will amend Section 69(11)(b) of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 at an early opportunity in order to require the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission to concern itself with the majority of victims whose rights have been abused by paramilitary organisations.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: Section 69(11)(b) of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 makes clear that the commission is to advise on those rights set out in the European Convention on Human Rights. The Government have no plans to amend this part of the legislation.

Intermediate Care Services

Baroness Barker: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What arrangements they have to monitor whether or not local authorities charge for services that are designated as intermediate care services, when it is the department's view that they should be free at the point of use.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: The Department of Health circular Intermediate Care (HSC 2001:001/LAC (2001-01) published on 19 January 2001 makes it clear that intermediate care should be free at the point of use. This circular is statutory guidance issued under Section 7 of the Local Authority Social Services Act 1970. We expect local authorities to comply with statutory guidance, and therefore have no special arrangements to monitor whether or not local authorities are charging for intermediate care services. A copy of the circular is available in the Library.

Intermediate Care Services

Baroness Barker: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many intermediate care beds they estimate will be required over the next 10 years in England; and upon what basis they have made that estimate.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: The National Health Service Plan sets a target of 5,000 additional intermediate care beds by 2003-04. Targets beyond that date have not yet been set.
	Estimates of future requirements for intermediate care beds will form part of the whole system capacity planning now required by the NHS and councils. The need for intermediate care beds cannot be looked at in isolation, but will depend upon the availability of other services (for example, acute hospital beds, primary and community health services and social services). Future planning of intermediate care services will also need to take into account the outcome of the evaluation of intermediate care currently being commissioned by the Department of Health.

Intermediate Care Services

Baroness Barker: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What performance indicators will be introduced to ensure that those with dementia or functional mental illness are not discriminated against in relation to access to intermediate care.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: While the Department of Health has no current plans to introduce a specific performance indicator relating to those with dementia or functional mental illness and intermediate care, the guidance (HSC 2001:001/LAC (2001-01) makes it clear that intermediate care services should be available to all those who might benefit from these services.

Medical Research Council:Autism Review

Lord Clement-Jones: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What advice they are giving to the Medical Research Council in order to assist it to avoid conflicts of interest among members of its review into autism.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: The Department of Health is in regular contact with the Medical Research Council (MRC) about progress with its review of the causes and epidemiology of autism. It has a well established approach to handling potential conflicts of interest in the development of scientific advice. We welcome the MRC's innovative approach to engaging a broad range of experts and lay people fully in its review. We have full confidence that the review process will ensure that its advice will be fair and balanced.

Human Genetic Databases: Government Response to Select Committee Report

Lord Peston: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When will they publish the Government's response to the report on human genetic databases from the House of Lords Science and Technology Committee.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: We have today published the Government's response by way of Command Paper 5236, copies of which have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

Sheep and Sheepmeat

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they propose to set up a private storage scheme to cope with the thousands of sheep which, due to the foot and mouth disease export restrictions, will come on to the United Kingdom market this autumn.

Earl Peel: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What measures they intend to put in place to support the sheep industry given the market implications of the inability to export sheep at the present time, and the likelihood that there will be no domestic market for many of the sheep that would normally have been exported but for the outbreak of foot and mouth disease; and
	Whether they will seek European Union approval for private storage aid for sheepmeat; and
	What measures they will put in place to ensure that sheepmeat which has been in storage is marketable after it is released.

Lord Whitty: The department has had intensive discussions with a wide range of industry interests and the European Commission about this, with a view to putting a strategy in place by the end of July, to apply from 1 September onwards. In the meantime, all possible action is being taken to eradicate the disease as soon as possible.
	All concerned are clear that in considering autumn livestock movements, control of foot and mouth disease and safeguarding animal welfare must continue to be our primary concerns. We are proceeding on the basis of veterinary and scientific advice. Full details will be published as soon as possible, but the arrangements for the autumn will cover the following aspects; the possibility of holding livestock markets in counties which have been free of foot and mouth disease for three months or more and where testing has been completed; the possibility of some relaxation in the criteria covering livestock movements outside infected areas; the possibility of promoting the domestic consumption of lamb in particular, and of negotiating with the European Commission an early resumption of pigmeat and sheepmeat exports, while not distrupting the domestic food supply chain.
	We are formally asking the European Commission to introduce a Private Storage Aid Scheme for sheepmeat in the autumn, including the provision for operators to store as vacuum packed primal cuts, which will assist with marketing when the meat comes out of store. We are also discussing with the Commission the possible adaptation of the Livestock Welfare Disposal Scheme to handle disposal of surplus lambs, and in the medium term the possible use of quota suspension or buy-out.

Arable Area Payments Scheme: Flooding

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will have to seek European Union approval to pay set-aside on additional land rendered uncultivatable by heavy rainfall and flooding.

Lord Whitty: We have already taken the necessary action on this. As my right honourable friend the then Minister of State (Joyce Quin) told my honourable friend the Member for Don Valley (Caroline Flint) in another place on 13 February 2001 (Official Report, col 120-21W), the European Commission confirmed, at the UK's request earlier this year, a number of changes to the rules of the Arable Area Payments Scheme for 2001, including the one referred to by the noble Baroness.

Environment Agency: Flood Responsibilities

Lord Hardy of Wath: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What proportion of the flooding incidents during the autumn of 2000 occurred on water courses not managed by the Environment Agency; what proportion occurred at locations which had no flood protection at all; and whether consideration is to be given to extending the role of the agency to allow consideration of cases of inadequate provision where it has at the present time little or no standing.

Lord Whitty: Approximately 10,000 properties were flooded in the late 2000 floods divided approximately as follows: 18 per cent from watercourses for which the Environment Agency is not the relevant operating authority; 14 per cent from a variety of inadequate drainage problems, mainly from highway and surface water drainage systems; 40 per cent from watercourses managed and maintained by the Agency where there is currently no flood protection; and 28 per cent from watercourses managed and maintained by the Agency where there is currently flood protection.
	The Environment Agency has a general duty to supervise all matters relating to flood defence. In November 1999 the agency published an elaboration of this duty including a commitment to investigate the causes of serious or repeated flood events on watercourses for which it is not responsible, and to identify potential solutions.

Foot and Mouth: Vehicle Cleansing

Earl Attlee: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether vehicles used to move animals culled during the foot and mouth outbreak can be satisfactorily cleaned so that they can be used to move grain during the forthcoming harvest; and what regulations are applicable; and
	What process could be used to clean and sterilise vehicles used to move animals culled during the foot and mouth outbreak but to be used for transport of grain in future; and
	What tests for cleanliness and food safety are available or appropriate for vehicles used to move animals culled during the foot and mouth outbreak but used for transport of grain in future and
	Whether there is any need to identify which vehicles have been used to move culled animals; and whether they will make that infomation widely available.

Lord Whitty: If a vehicle is properly cleansed and disinfected after it has been used to move culled animals, it should be safe to be used for the transport of grain. However, we understand that there are concerns and officials will be meeting with industry representatives to discuss the matter.
	The Foot and Mouth Order (1983) (as amended) sets out the legal requirements for the cleansing and disinfection of vehicles used for the carriage of carcases. The order does not include a requirement that such vehicles are identified to show that they had previously carried carcases.
	Guidance on biosecurity in relation to the harvesting (including the movement) of grain is available on the DEFRA website at: http://defraweb/animalh/diseases/fmd/farmers/during/harvestfinal.PDF.
	Annex 2 provides general guidance on cleansing and disinfection of vehicles. There is no commercial test for verifying the presence of the foot and mouth disease virus.

Foot and Mouth

Lord Willoughby de Broke: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will provide a week-by-week breakdown from 20 February of the numbers of:
	(a) diagnosed foot and mouth cases; (b) farms (as holdings) on which foot and mouth disease was confirmed and animals slaughtered; (c) farms (as holdings) on which animals were slaughtered as "dangerous contacts"; and (d) farms (as holdings) on which animals were slaughtered "on suspicion".

Lord Whitty: Slaughter is complete on all holdings where foot and mouth disease has been confirmed, up to the week ending 15 July.
	
		(a) and (b) Weekly breakdown of the number of infected premises from 19 February to 15 July 2001.
		
			 Week ending Total 
			 25 Feb 2001 13 
			 4 Mar 2001 66 
			 11 Mar 2001 126 
			 18 Mar 2001 151 
			 25 Mar 2001 298 
			 1 Apr 2001 290 
			 8 Apr 2001 225 
			 15 Apr 2001 175 
			 22 Apr 2001 104 
			 29 Apr 2001 67 
			 6 May 2001 46 
			 13 May 2001 33 
			 20 May 2001 24 
			 27 May 2001 33 
			 3 Jun 2001 44 
			 10 Jun 2001 28 
			 17 Jun 2001 34 
			 24 Jun 2001 22 
			 1 Jul 2001 21 
			 8 Jul 2001 23 
			 15 Jul 2001 25 
			  
			 Total 1,1848 
		
	
	
		(c) Weekly breakdown of premises on which animals have been slaughtered as "dangerous contacts" since 19 February
		
			 Week ending Total 
			 25 Feb 2001 25 
			 04 Mar 2001 318 
			 11 Mar 2001 325 
			 18 Mar 2001 337 
			 25 Mar 2001 337 
			 01 Apr 2001 933 
			 08 Apr 2001 938 
			 15 Apr 2001 935 
			 22 Apr 2001 397 
			 29 Apr 2001 207 
			 06 May 2001 108 
			 13 May 2001 107 
			 20 May 2001 74 
			 27 May 2001 82 
			 03 Jun 2001 122 
			 10 Jun 2001 96 
			 17 Jun 2001 108 
			 24 Jun 2001 69 
			 01 Jul 2001 62 
			 08 Jul 2001 79 
			 15 Jul 2001 60 
			  
			 Total 6,053 
		
	
	339 dangerous contact cases have been converted to infected premises. These premises are also included in the table answering parts (a) and (b) of the question.
	
		(d) Weekly breakdown of the number of premises on which animals have been "slaughtered on suspicion"
		
			 Week ending Total 
			 04 Mar 2001 2 
			 11 Mar 2001 3 
			 25 Mar 2001 12 
			 01 Apr 2001 43 
			 08 Apr 2001 36 
			 15 Apr 2001 41 
			 22 Apr 2001 43 
			 29 Apr 2001 25 
			 06 May 2001 23 
			 13 May 2001 19 
			 20 May 2001 6 
			 27 May 2001 9 
			 03 Jun 2001 2 
			 10 Jun 2001 7 
			 17 Jun 2001 5 
			 24 Jun 2001 6 
			 01 Jul 2001 5 
			 08 Jul 2001 5 
			 15 Jul 2001 3 
			  
			 Total 295 
		
	
	Seventy-six slaughter on suspicion cases have been converted to infected premises. These premises are also included in the table answering parts (a) and (b) of the question.

Foot and Mouth

Lord Willoughby de Broke: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will provide a week-by-week breakdown since 20 February of the number of cases of "slaughter on suspicion" and the number of those subsequently confirmed as infected with foot and mouth disease.

Lord Whitty: The table below shows the weekly breakdown of slaughter on suspicion cases and the number of those that were subsequently converted to IPs on the receipt of positive test results.
	
		
			 Week Ending Total number of SOS cases Number converted to IPs 
			 04/03/2001 2 -- 
			 11/03/2001 3 -- 
			 25/03/2001 14 -- 
			 01/04/2001 43 11 
			 08/04/2001 37 7 
			 15/04/2001 41 7 
			 22/04/2001 45 16 
			 29/04/2001 26 6 
			 06/05/2001 23 3 
			 13/05/2001 23 3 
			 20/05/2001 6 2 
			 27/05/2001 9 3 
			 03/06/2001 2 1 
			 10/06/2001 7 5 
			 17/06/2001 5 2 
			 24/06/2001 7 3 
			 01/07/2001 5 1 
			 08/07/2001 5 3 
			 15/07/2001 5 3 
			  
			 Total 308 76

Foot and Mouth

Lord Willoughby de Broke: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will provide a week-by-week breakdown since 20 February of the number of farms slaughtered out under the "contiguous cull" regime and the number of those subsequently confirmed as infected with foot and mouth disease.

Lord Whitty: The following table shows contiguous premises identified by week, and of these the number that have converted to infected premises. Conversion was in the main due to diagnosis on clinical grounds.
	
		
			 Week end New contiguous premises Contiguous premises converted to infected premises 
			 25/02/2001 7 0 
			 04/03/2001 29 1 
			 11/03/2001 28 2 
			 18/03/2001 77 6 
			 25/03/2001 222 4 
			 01/04/2001 451 21 
			 08/04/2001 410 12 
			 15/04/2001 457 28 
			 22/04/2001 161 9 
			 29/04/2001 92 4 
			 06/05/2001 59 1 
			 13/05/2001 91 3 
			 20/05/2001 69 3 
			 27/05/2001 78 5 
			 03/06/2001 122 8 
			 10/06/2001 93 10 
			 17/06/2001 105 11 
			 24/06/2001 63 7 
			 01/07/2001 63 7 
			 08/07/2001 64 5 
			 15/07/2001 57 8 
			 Grand Total 2798 155 
		
	
	There may have been livestock on some contiguous premises that were infected, but clinical symptoms were not present at slaughter. As it has not been possible to take blood samples from livestock slaughtered on all contiguous premises, it is impossible to estimate the overall proportion of CPs that were infected.

Foot and Mouth

Lord Willoughby de Broke: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will provide a week-by-week breakdown, since 20 February, of the number of farms where notifications of suspected foot and mouth disease were received from private vets; and how many of these were subsequently served with "infected place" notices and slaughtered out.

Lord Whitty: The table below shows the number of infected premises (IPs) which were initially reported by private veterinary surgeons, on a weekly basis from 19 February 2001.
	
		
			 Week ending Number of IPs 
			 25 February 2 
			 4 March 5 
			 11 March 6 
			 18 March 2 
			 25 March 8 
			 1 April 5 
			 8 April 2 
			 15 April 2 
			 22 April 1 
			 29 April 2 
			 6 May 2 
			 13 May 0 
			 20 May 0 
			 27 May 2 
			 3 June 3 
			 10 June 1 
			 17 June 0 
			 24 June 2 
			 1 July 1 
			 8 July 1 
			 15 July 0 
		
	
	It is not possible to provide figures for the total number of farms where notifications of suspected foot and mouth disease were received from private veterinary surgeons. DEFRA does not hold centrally collated records of cases reported by private vets which are concluded not to have foot and mouth disease.

Foot and Mouth

Baroness Masham of Ilton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the number of sheep affected by foot and mouth disease broken down into lambs, ewes and rams; and what for each group are the numbers of (a) animals culled, (b) dangerous contacts and (c) infected premises.

Lord Whitty: The number of sheep recorded as slaughtered as a result of foot and mouth disease is not broken down into lambs, ewes and rams. The total number of sheep slaughtered in Great Britain for each of the categories requested as at 17:00, 19 July 2001 is as follows:
	(a) total number of sheep slaughtered as a result of foot and mouth disease: 2,883,338;
	(b) number of sheep slaughtered on dangerous contact premises: 1,940,544;
	(c) number of sheep slaughtered on infected premises: 844,564.

Foot and Mouth

Baroness Masham of Ilton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether any of the viruses which cause foot and mouth disease can survive in people's noses; if so, for how long; and whether foot and mouth disease can be transmitted by sneezing.

Lord Whitty: The sampling of human subjects who have been in contact with animals infected with the foot and mouth disease virus, showed that the virus could be recovered from the nose, throat, saliva and from air expelled during coughing, sneezing, talking and breathing. In the majority of subjects, the virus could not be recovered from the nose after 3.5 hours but in one case, virus was found in one person's nose after 28 hours.

Deer Act 1991

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they intend to review the Deer Act 1991 and implement the recommendations of the Savage report.

Lord Whitty: The Government have no plans to review the Deer Act 1991. The Government understand that the Savage report was commissioned by the National Trust. It is therefore for the National Trust to decide what action it wishes to take on the report's recommendations. The Government have given support to the deer initiative and believe that local deer management groups have an important role in deer management.

Water Framework Directive

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is their estimate of the cost per hectare to United Kingdom farmers of the Water Framework Directive.

Lord Whitty: Estimates were prepared in 1998 to illustrate possible costs for notional average farms of reducing diffuse pollution. These assumed an average compliance cost of approximately £175 per hectare per annum for arable land and £117 per hectare per annum for grassland. These costs would be incurred annually from 2012 at the latest, when all measures required by the directive have to be operational.
	These figures did not relate to actual costs to farmers necessary to meet the directive's objectives in relation to specific measures to control agricultural pollution. This is because the need for, and use of such additional measures, has yet to be decided. The figures were based on data from a range of area-based schemes to compensate farmers for income lost as a result of changes to agricultural practice. The amount of compensation awarded provided an indication of the costs to farmers of implementing best agricultural management schemes in order to reduce pollution.
	The estimated average compliance costs do not apply to all farms and should not be assumed to apply to the whole area of any farm where a reduction in diffuse pollution was judged to be necessary. This is because action should not be required on all farms to meet the directive's objectives, nor the whole area of every farm where some action is needed.
	The above costings therefore remain fairly speculative in nature and the Government recognise the need to update them where possible. A more accurate assessment of costs to different farm types will be possible once the Government have assessed what are the full range of additional measures necessary to address diffuse pollution from agriculture, and to what extent they would need to be used to meet the directive's objectives by 2015. The Government plan to consult on the need for additional measures in England to control diffuse agricultural pollution and other implementation issues later this year or early in 2002. Revised costings can then be provided alongside the publication of the draft implementing regulations for the directive in 2002 or early 2003. In the meantime, the Government are considering what more can be done to update and improve the 1998 estimates.

Foot and Mouth: Recovery Plan

Lord Inglewood: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether any approaches have been made to the European Commission, either formally or informally, on establishing a recovery plan for areas affected by foot and mouth disease either for the agricultural sector or for the non-agricultural sector; and, if so (a) what response has been received; and (b) what are the financial parameters for funding such a plan.(
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Whitty: I will write to the noble Lord with a full reply as soon as possible.

Foot and Mouth: On-farm Burial

The Duke of Montrose: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether at the start of the current foot and mouth outbreak individual permits were required for the burial of slaughtered animals at on-farm sites under the rules governing the pollution of groundwater administered by the Environment Agency.

Lord Whitty: Groundwater regulations authorisations ("permits") are required for the disposal of listed substances at a specified site. Carcasses and ashes contain listed substances and so authorisations are required for the burial of slaughtered animals. The requirements of the regulations have been implemented throughout the foot and mouth disease outbreak.

Foot and Mouth: On-farm Burial

The Duke of Montrose: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether there was any time lapse between a request by the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to carry out an on-farm burial of carcasses resulting from the foot and mouth outbreak and the necessary response from the Environment Agency.

Lord Whitty: Under the Groundwater Regulations 1998, before authorising disposals of carcasses, a risk assessment ("prior investigation") must be undertaken to ensure that the proposed disposal will not cause pollution of controlled waters. In the majority of cases, the Environment Agency undertook this risk assessment within three hours of being asked to do so by MAFF/DEFRA. Larger and more complex disposal sites may have taken longer to risk assess in order to ensure risks posed to ground and surface waters were fully considered.

Foot and Mouth: On-farm Burial

The Duke of Montrose: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether general guidance was produced to show areas where an on-farm burial of carcasses resulting from the foot and mouth outbreak might be suitable; and, if so, when it was made available.

Lord Whitty: The Environment Agency assessed each proposed disposal on a site specific basis.
	Existing published guidance on risk assessment and tools to determine groundwater vulnerability, available prior to the foot and mouth disease outbreak, were used as part of the assessment to determine suitable areas for on-farm burials of carcasses.

Foot and Mouth: On-farm Burial

The Duke of Montrose: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When mass burial pits for carcasses resulting from the foot and mouth outbreak were first sanctioned.

Lord Whitty: The decision to construct the first mass burial site (at Great Orton in Cumbria) for the disposal of carcasses resulting from foot and mouth outbreak was announced on 25 March 2001.

Foot and Mouth: Compensation Payments

Earl Peel: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will make supplementary payments to farmers whose compensation for livestock culled in the early stages of the outbreak of foot and mouth disease was considerably lower than that paid for more recent cases and who are therefore disadvantaged with respect to restocking.

Lord Whitty: Ministers are currently considering valuation issues. My right honourable Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Commons) (Mr Elliot Morley) will be meeting interested parties in the coming weeks to discuss the question of backdating standard values.

Cattle: Over Thirty Months Scheme

Earl Peel: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they intend to recommence the Over Thirty Months Scheme for the disposal of cattle; and
	What contingency plans they have prepared to deal with the estimated 250,000 backlog of cattle that would have been disposed of under the Over Thirty Months Scheme but for the outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease.

Lord Whitty: The Over Thirty Month Scheme (OTMS) has been suspended in most of the UK since the first outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease in February. The only exceptions have been in Northern Ireland and the Orkney Islands together with the arrangements for eligible OTMS casualty animals slaughtered on farm.
	The Government have kept the situation under constant review and have been very much aware of industry concerns that a backlog of animals was developing on farms. However, the fight against foot-and-mouth disease remains the overriding priority and therefore has first call on processing capacity whenever it is needed.
	As my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs predicted last week, the Rural Payments Agency has now advised Agriculture Ministers that there is sufficient disposal capacity to restart the OTMS in Great Britain. OTMS started again in Scotland on 23 July, and we hope that it will be possible to restart it in England on 30 July.

Foot and Mouth: Livestock Movements

Earl Peel: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What plans they have to allow a freer movement of livestock in areas which are considered to be at a low risk of infection by foot and mouth disease.

Lord Whitty: The Government have announced that they are considering relaxing the criteria for livestock movements outside infected areas this autumn but for now the current restrictions in place on the general movement of livestock remain. However, tighter movement controls are being imposed in the 10km areas around new cases of the disease thereby reducing movements to an absolute minimum for 30 days.

Foot and Mouth: Trade Restrictions

Earl Peel: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they expect to resume the export trade in live pigs, pigmeat and sheepmeat.

Lord Whitty: Following the confirmation of foot and mouth disease in the UK in February, the EU Commission immediately restricted the export of susceptible livestock and animal products from the UK. The UK's foot and mouth disease situation is regularly reviewed by the EU's Standing Veterinary Committee (SVC) which agreed to lift export restrictions from Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man from 7 June. At the meeting on 10/11 July, the SVC agreed to extend the current trade restrictions applying to Great Britain until 30 September 2001 but to review the situation on 11/12 September. The restrictions which currently apply are set out in Commission Decision 2001/356/EC as amended.
	In considering whether to lift these trade restrictions, the EU Commission will take into account the recommendations of the Office International des Epizooties, the international animal health organisation.

Foot and Mouth: Agri-environmental Investments

Earl Peel: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What proposals they have for making agri-environmental investments, for example the installation of pollution equipment, on farms where livestock has been culled as a result of foot-and-mouth disease and which have not yet been restocked.

Lord Whitty: I will write to the noble Earl with a full reply as soon as possible.

Domestic Waste Recycling: Foot and Mouth Restrictions

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether local authority programmes for recycling domestic waste will be affected by restrictions resulting from foot and mouth disease on the spreading of compost to agricultural land.

Lord Whitty: The Government recognise that there needs to be a balance between the need to achieve the waste strategy and recycling targets through increased composting, and the need to protect animal health. Existing controls on the disposal of catering waste containing meat have been extended as a result of foot and mouth disease and have in effect prohibited the spreading on land of compost derived from catering waste from premises which handle meat. The Government are commissioning urgently an independent risk assessment to see if these controls can be lifted and what composting standards and conditions would be required to allow them to be lifted. Other areas of recycling are unaffected.

Animal Protein Test

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether research into the development of a validated test to differentiate between animal and fish protein is ongoing; and, if so, when a successful outcome is envisaged.

Lord Whitty: The Department is currently funding several research projects to bring a test for animal proteins up to the standard required for EU validation. The outcome is not, however, expected for several months.

Foot and Mouth: Counties Affected

Lord Marlesford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In which counties in the United Kingdom there have been confirmed cases of foot and mouth disease this year, indicating in respect of each county the date of the first and most recent case.

Lord Whitty: The counties in the United Kingdom where foot and mouth disease has been confirmed, with the relevant dates, are shown in the table below.
	
		
			 County First reported case Most recent case 
			 Avon 26/03/2001 02/04/2001 
			 Berwickshire 24/04/2001 30/05/2001 
			 Cheshire 13/03/2001 02/06/2001 
			 Cleveland 20/04/2001 20/04/2001 
			 Clwyd 16/03/2001 16/03/2001 
			 Cornwall 03/03/2001 06/04/2001 
			 Cumbria 20/02/2001 19/07/2001 
			 Derbyshire 07/03/2001 27/03/2001 
			 Devonshire 25/02/2001 17/06/2001 
			 Dumfries & Galloway 01/03/2001 23/05/2001 
			 Durham 27/02/2001 03/06/2001 
			 Essex 20/02/2001 12/04/2001 
			 Gloucestershire 10/03/2001 17/04/2001 
			 Greater London--East 22/02/2001 02/03/2001 
			 Greater Manchester 17/07/2001 18/07/2001 
			 Gwent 16/03/2001 19/07/2001 
			 Gwynedd 27/02/2001 24/03/2001 
			 Hereford & Worcester 27/02/2001 25/04/2001 
			 Kent 10/03/2001 02/04/2001 
			 Lancashire 27/02/2001 28/06/2001 
			 Leicestershire 28/02/2001 23/04/2001 
			 Mid Glamorgan 08/04/2001 25/04/2001 
			 North Yorkshire 07/03/2001 18/07/2001 
			 Northamptonshire 27/02/2001 27/02/2001 
			 Oxfordshire 03/03/2001 15/03/2001 
			 Powys 28/02/2001 18/07/2001 
			 Roxburgh 28/03/2001 18/04/2001 
			 Shropshire 10/03/2001 11/05/2001 
			 Somerset 08/03/2001 17/06/2001 
			 Staffordshire 02/03/2001 09/04/2001 
			 Tyne & Wear 23/02/2001 24/03/2001 
			 Warwickshire 18/03/2001 26/03/2001 
			 West Glamorgan 19/04/2001 21/04/2001 
			 West Yorkshire 07/03/2001 12/07/2001 
			 Wiltshire 26/02/2001 10/04/2001 
			 County Down 01/03/2001 01/03/2001 
			 Co. Tyrone 13/04/2001 22/04/2001 
			 Co. Antrim 15/04/2001 15/04/2001

BSE Statistics

Lord Marlesford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will publish an updated table showing the number of cases of BSE confirmed in Britain each week during the current calendar year, together with the moving annual total of cases for each 52-week period.

Lord Whitty: I will write to the noble Lord as soon as the figures are available.

Foot and Mouth: Inquiry

The Countess of Mar: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they intend to carry out an inquiry into the origins and development of the present outbreak of foot and mouth disease.

Lord Whitty: The Prime Minister has said that there will be an inquiry and that we will publish the results. He emphasised the importance of conducting the inquiry quickly but also said that it would be better to have an inquiry after we have eradicated the disease. The nature and timing of an inquiry is one for the Prime Minister. In any event it is likely that the Select Committee on Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, the Public Accounts Committee and possibly others will launch their own inquiries.

Foot and Mouth Compensation: Official Secrets Act

Lord Glentoran: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether contracts to receive compensation from the Government as a result of foot and mouth disease contain an Official Secrets Act clause; whether anyone signing such contracts would thereby be prevented from giving evidence at any independent external inquiry into foot and mouth disease.

Lord Whitty: Farmers who receive compensation for animals slaughtered as a result of the foot and mouth disease outbreak are required only to sign a form (Form FM5) stating that they have received a copy of the Statement of Valuation. They would therefore not be prevented by the Official Secrets Act from giving evidence at any inquiry or otherwise disclosing details of their payments.
	The phase relating to the Official Secrets Act is included because the form used is a standard one for government contacts.

Countryside and Rights of Way Act

Lord Williams of Elvel: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they propose to commence Schedule 12 to the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000.

Lord Whitty: Schedule 12 amended the law enforcement provisions of Part I of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and came into effect on 30 January 2001.

Home Energy Efficiency Scheme

Baroness Maddock: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is required of agencies managing the Warm Front Scheme for the Government in terms of:
	(a) publication of data on works carried out under the scheme;
	(b) the form in which information is made available;
	(c) the frequency with which it is updated;
	(d) the content of published information; and
	(e) what, if anything, is exempt from publication.

Lord Whitty: As part of their contract for managing the Home Energy Efficiency Scheme in England, both scheme managers provide free of charge to all local authorities in England details of the work carried out in their area. This includes the number of properties improved through the scheme together with details of the energy efficiency improvement achieved.
	Both scheme managers will shortly publish a report setting out the performance of the scheme over the past year. From this autumn, they will also begin to publish quarterly reports on their web-sites on the performance of the scheme. These reports will include the number of homes improved and the average energy efficiency improvement achieved, as well as further details based on suggestions received from interested groups. The scheme managers have also responded to ad hoc requests for information from interested groups.
	The department is generally content with the publication of most information relating to the performance of the scheme. The specific exceptions are where it relates to the details of an individual householder or property in which case prior written approval is required from the individual concerned; or the information requested can only be provided at disproportionate cost in which case an appropriate fee may be charged by the scheme managers.

Home Energy Efficiency Scheme

Baroness Maddock: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What information will be published to enable an independent assessment of the extent to which works carried out under the Warm Front Scheme remove individual households from fuel poverty and make a general contribution to targets contained in the draft United Kingdom Fuel Poverty Strategy.

Lord Whitty: The Home Energy Efficiency Scheme managers shall shortly publish a report setting out performance of the scheme over the past year. This will include details of the average energy efficiency improvements achieved under the scheme. The scheme does not collect income details for each household. Therefore it is not possible to determine on an individual basis whether the person has been moved out of fuel poverty. In any case it would not be possible to publish details of individual cases without the written permission of the person concerned.
	A major two year study into the relationship between fuel poverty and health is planned to start this winter. Part of this study will involve considering the effectiveness of the scheme in moving individual households out of fuel poverty. The steering group for this study includes representatives from a number of external groups with an interest in this area.

Peace: Government Support for Education

Lord Jenkins of Putney: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they would support the development in London of a museum or similar education body with the object of encouraging a culture of peace.

Baroness Blackstone: The Department for Culture, Media and Sport sponsors the Imperial War Museum which, together with its major permanent exhibition about the holocaust opened in June 2000, is a powerful statement for peace and an objective historical resource about war and its impact on society. The Imperial War Museum and the Holocaust Exhibition are a major educational facility visited by children and adults from this country and from abroad and are an important resource for the national curriculum. In November 2000 a Holocaust Memorial Day education pack, which is a teaching resource for schools, was launched at the then Department for Education and Employment. The Government's policy is to increase access to existing museums rather than to create new ones.

Equality: Ministerial Responsibilities

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Baroness Morgan on 5 July, which specific aspects of equality policy are respectively the responsibility of (a) the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; (b) the Home Secretary; and (c) the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions.

Baroness Morgan of Huyton: Ministerial responsibilities are set out in The List of Ministerial Responsibilities published by the Cabinet Office.

Government Departments:Diversity and Equal Opportunities

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether research has been conducted into the prevalence of discrimination in government departments on grounds of sexual orientation; and, if so, with what results?

Baroness Morgan of Huyton: On 26 June 2001, the Cabinet Office published a report on the results of a Civil Service-wide survey of the opinions of staff on diversity and equal opportunities issues, a copy of which has been placed in the Libraries of both Houses. Overall, this showed that opinion generally did not differ significantly as a result of sexuality across the broad range of issues covered by the survey, but there were concerns among gay, lesbian and bisexual staff about specific questions of unfair treatment.

House of Lords:Waste Paper Recycling

Lord Marlesford: asked the Chairman of Committees:
	What arrangements exist for the recycling of waste paper (other than "white paper") generated in that part of the parliamentary estate occupied by the House of Lords.

Lord Tordoff: At present, paper generated in that part of the parliamentary estate occupied by the House of Lords is recovered and incinerated. The incineration process produces electricity which is used on the parliamentary estate.
	Arrangements for recycling waste paper are currently being introduced across the parliamentary estate. The House of Lords is actively involved in energy conservation and waste management in conjunction with the Works Services Directorate and will participate in the waste paper recycling programme.

PDVN: Unplanned Interruptions

Lord Elton: asked the Chairman of Committees:
	On how many occasions in the 12 months to 30 June it was impossible for users of the Parliamentary Data and Video Network to establish remote access to the system.

Lord Tordoff: The Parliamentary Communications Directorate (PCD) is responsible for the Parliamentary Data and Video Network (PDVN). PCD usually only record the details of network failures during normal working hours. In the year prior to 30 June 2001, the PDVN was recorded as being generally unavailable as a result of unplanned interruptions four times during normal working hours. One unplanned interruption was noted during a weekend.
	There were also five planned interruptions at weekends.
	PCD does not record problems experienced by individual users in accessing the network as an overall service interruption provided that the network is still accessible to other users.

PDVN: Unplanned Interruptions

Lord Elton: asked the Chairman of Committees:
	During the 12 months to 30 June what was the total number of hours during which it was impossible for users of the Parliamentary Data and Video Network to establish remote access to the system.

Lord Tordoff: The unplanned interruptions for the year to 30 June 2001 resulted in a loss of eight hours during working days and 17 hours over one weekend. PCD does not record the hours of unavailability due to planned interruptions at weekends.

PCD Helpdesk

Lord Elton: asked the Chairman of Committees:
	During the 12 months to 30 June what was the average time users of the Parliamentary Data and Video Network (a) in the parliamentary estate and (b) accessing the system remotely had to wait for a response to a telephoned request for help.

Lord Tordoff: The average time to answer a telephone call to the PCD Helpdesk during working hours is recorded at eight seconds. However, the call handling software in use, and the way this data is currently recorded, may mean that eight seconds understates the average wait experienced by callers. PCD is therefore making changes to the call handling software to address this problem and allow more accurate recording of average waits. As all calls are treated equally, there is no difference in the average wait between calls from the parliamentary estate and calls from a remote location.